|
|
04-04-2011, 06:49 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 24
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Mod 642 & 442 difference
What is the difference between current 642 & 442 moodels other than the color. Seems like I heard the finish on the 642 can be damaged by Hoppes #9. Does this apply to the black finish on the 442 as well?
Many Thanks
Dave
|
04-04-2011, 06:53 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NE Iowa
Posts: 5,450
Likes: 1,956
Liked 3,499 Times in 1,287 Posts
|
|
Main difference, other than color, is the cylinder. Carbon steel on the 442, stainless on the 642, which is why I prefer the latter for carry. Hoppes has never hurt mine.
Jim
|
04-04-2011, 10:02 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 56
Likes: 1
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
I have one of each and use Hoppe's on both with no problems.
|
04-04-2011, 10:28 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
The newer 642s have a clear coat that can start flaking off. Whether or not Hoppes would trigger that, I can't say.
|
04-05-2011, 02:44 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,821
Likes: 4,248
Liked 15,231 Times in 4,173 Posts
|
|
Aside from cosmetics (e.g.; finish) nothing. The 642 may wear better in hot climates, but my 442 (1992) is satin nickle, I'm careful with it in the summer and it still looks great.
|
04-05-2011, 02:49 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,202
Likes: 9,079
Liked 1,921 Times in 1,043 Posts
|
|
The clear coat on my 637 looks so rancid that I'm going to have it duracoated at some point. I wish they made a 637 like the 442. Maybe I should just buy the 442.
|
04-05-2011, 03:58 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 231
Likes: 4
Liked 23 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
As far as I understand there is no difference other than the finish. I have been carrying a 642-1 in my pocket everday for about 4 years now and the finish is still perfect except some scuffs I put on it. Not sure if it matters but I live in Houston, TX and it is very humid.
In addition I clean it with Hoppes #9 and it has not caused any issues for me so far.
|
04-05-2011, 04:48 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 222
Likes: 11
Liked 131 Times in 44 Posts
|
|
I've read that Hoppe's will leave the clear coat on a 642 looking like a peeling sunburn. Just in case I clean mine only with Breakfree CLP. Does a good job and not nearly as harsh.
|
04-05-2011, 06:55 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Se. Pa.
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 67
Liked 81 Times in 50 Posts
|
|
How about if you just dont use Hoppes? Use something else like MPro 7 . http://www.mpro7.com/index.html
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
04-06-2011, 12:37 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The South
Posts: 809
Likes: 221
Liked 665 Times in 295 Posts
|
|
Based on responses in this thread, perhaps it is the device used for cleaning (rag or brush,etc..) rather than the Hoppes No. 9 that's responsibile for the finish damage on the 642. Just a thought.
|
04-06-2011, 01:04 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 292
Liked 641 Times in 345 Posts
|
|
There must be some kind of conspiracy out there against Hoppe's #9, one of the supreme products to be made in North America. I've been using it since 1966 on all kinds of guns, and it gets them clean. Never any damage. And it smells good! Similar conspiracy against WD-40. Hogwash. Baloney. Malarkey.
|
04-06-2011, 10:01 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 24
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Thanks for all the responses. I'm not clear on 1 item yet. Is the 442 cylinder & barrel stainless or not. S & W website says the 442 cylinder is stainless.
Thanks again
|
04-06-2011, 10:20 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Fort Knox, Kentucky
Posts: 897
Likes: 275
Liked 1,353 Times in 258 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by welldoya
I've read that Hoppe's will leave the clear coat on a 642 looking like a peeling sunburn...
|
I don't leave the gun soaking in a vat of Hoppe's overnight, but in the course of normal cleaning it doesn't seem to have hurt the finish on mine.
|
04-06-2011, 10:29 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 479
Likes: 107
Liked 116 Times in 57 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximumbob54
The clear coat on my 637 looks so rancid that I'm going to have it duracoated at some point. I wish they made a 637 like the 442. Maybe I should just buy the 442.
|
My 637 is starting to look pretty sad as well. I may attempt to strip the clear coat and polish it like this guy did with his 642......
Last edited by Nevadadvx; 04-06-2011 at 10:34 PM.
|
04-07-2011, 11:14 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 587
Likes: 125
Liked 134 Times in 58 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfisherdave
Thanks for all the responses. I'm not clear on 1 item yet. Is the 442 cylinder & barrel stainless or not. S & W website says the 442 cylinder is stainless.
Thanks again
|
Depends, generally a 642 has a stainless steel cylinder and barrel. The 442 those components are carbon steel with a matte black finish. Both have a aluminum alloy frame. However the 442 Pro that I have is listed as having a carbon steel barrel but with a stainless steel cylinder with a matte black finsh. So it pays to know the model and when it was made.
CD
__________________
De Oppresso Liber
|
04-07-2011, 02:51 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 5,057
Likes: 524
Liked 1,911 Times in 788 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfisherdave
Thanks for all the responses. I'm not clear on 1 item yet. Is the 442 cylinder & barrel stainless or not. S & W website says the 442 cylinder is stainless.
Thanks again
|
Some are. Some are not. How's that for an answer.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
|
04-07-2011, 06:00 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combat_Diver
However the 442 Pro that I have is listed as having a carbon steel barrel but with a stainless steel cylinder with a matte black finsh.
|
I can't find anywhere official where it says the barrel is carbon steel and the cylinder is stainless for the NL 442 PRO. My 442 PRO should arrive to me tomorrow and I had thought the barrel was blued stainless as well as the cylinder. Not a big deal, but details like that usually don't slip past me as I research things thoroughly before I buy them.
Is there anywhere I can find that information where it lists that the barrel is carbon steel for the 442 Pro other than the "canned" sales description that you find on every online retailers website? Anytime a carbon steel barrel is mentioned, I see no mention of a stainless cylinder and vice versa.
Thanks.
|
04-07-2011, 07:31 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEVN3
Is there anywhere I can find that information where it lists that the barrel is carbon steel for the 442 Pro other than the "canned" sales description that you find on every online retailers website? Anytime a carbon steel barrel is mentioned, I see no mention of a stainless cylinder and vice versa.
|
I have previously looked for the same information, but have not been able to find it anywhere.
The only place I have found which lists the 442 Pro (and the M&P 340) as have a stainless cylinder is on S&W's Web site. However, they do not list the material used for the barrel.
(Side note: The M&P 340 has a two-piece barrel. I've always assumed that the barrel liner was stainless.)
I guess what I am saying is that I've wondered the same thing you have about the 442 and have not been able to find a satisfactory answer.
|
04-07-2011, 08:14 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
These are more rhetorical questions than anything:
Why would there be a stainless cylinder with a carbon steel barrel for a concealed carry revolver?
I plan on sweating all over this thing anytime I leave the house and I would like a little more corrosion resistance beyond what bluing offers, hence my choice for what I perceived to be an all aluminum and stainless NL 442.
In other words, what would be the point of mixing stainless components with other components that could corrode on the same frame?
Are there any other examples of S&W doing this?
|
04-07-2011, 08:50 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 5,057
Likes: 524
Liked 1,911 Times in 788 Posts
|
|
I think a lot of it is nothing more than manufacturing convenience. They use what they have in stock. If sweat is going to be a major issue, I recommend having the gun refinished. Black-T, Robar, etc.
Honestly, I wouldn't worry too much about it. The only issues I've had with rusting and S&W revolvers is blue steel guns with rubber grips. You have to have a good preventive maintenance program for that combo.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
|
04-07-2011, 09:30 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Alden, NY
Posts: 112
Likes: 46
Liked 40 Times in 6 Posts
|
|
Hey,
I have (2) S&W 442's... The Hoppes has not hurt them althouth I haven't scrubbed the outer finish while cleaning. I like to wipe dry and then swab with Wellworth A2Z All Purpose for a soft sheen that seemingly imparts a light lubriscity that displaces moisture. I use the A2Z on all of my firearms and have for years... Great Stuff!
__________________
Mike...ConquestN98858
|
04-08-2011, 02:18 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 296
Likes: 8
Liked 33 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photoman44
I think a lot of it is nothing more than manufacturing convenience. They use what they have in stock. If sweat is going to be a major issue, I recommend having the gun refinished. Black-T, Robar, etc.
Honestly, I wouldn't worry too much about it.
|
This is surely the correct answer. Robar NP3+ if you're worried about rust.
|
04-08-2011, 05:27 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 587
Likes: 125
Liked 134 Times in 58 Posts
|
|
The 442 Pro has a carbon steel bbl and a matte black stainless steel cylinder
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore...on%20clips.pdf
The 642 Pro Series Powerport has a stainless steel cylinder and bbl with a matte black finish
Product: Model 642
CD
__________________
De Oppresso Liber
|
04-08-2011, 07:18 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 24
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Thanks again for all the input. I went ahead and bought the Mod 442 today. I just like it's looks better than the 642. I was able to find a no lock version. Plan on starting to break it in this weekend.
|
04-08-2011, 07:26 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Se. Pa.
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 67
Liked 81 Times in 50 Posts
|
|
all new 442s without the lock made in the last 3 years have a stainless barrel. You can tell, because it will be marked with an "S". The lock model 442 was still using carbon steel barrels, as far as I know. Another way you can tell is by the front sight... The stainless barrel has a little notch in it, like the above picture, the carbon steel barrel doesnt.
|
04-09-2011, 03:38 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 587
Likes: 125
Liked 134 Times in 58 Posts
|
|
allglock,
Where's this "S"? My 442 Pro has that notch also.
CD
__________________
De Oppresso Liber
|
04-09-2011, 08:33 AM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Se. Pa.
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 67
Liked 81 Times in 50 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combat_Diver
allglock,
Where's this "S"? My 442 Pro has that notch also.
CD
|
Its underneath on the flat portion of the barrel.
|
04-09-2011, 08:50 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 24
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
I have the no lock, notch in the sight, but no S on bottom of barrel.
|
04-09-2011, 11:29 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: KY
Posts: 435
Likes: 1
Liked 33 Times in 17 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfisherdave
I have the no lock, notch in the sight, but no S on bottom of barrel.
|
Same here, and thats on my 642-1 and 442-1 Pro. But my older ones did have the S. For some reason they are not marking the newest ones, even the 642s.
|
04-10-2011, 03:28 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 587
Likes: 125
Liked 134 Times in 58 Posts
|
|
Thanks,
That's one area I don't have a picture of down range. Will have to wait til I get home to check it out.
CD
__________________
De Oppresso Liber
|
08-30-2016, 07:05 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chester County, PA
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 5,320
Liked 2,022 Times in 725 Posts
|
|
Sorry for raising the dead thread. I'm considering the 442 or 642. I like the looks of the 442 slightly better, but I prefer function over looks. Is there a huge difference between these two guns? Assume they'll remain LIGHTLY coated in CLP for protection and cleaned after every range trip. I will carry whichever model I get as a BUG in an ankle holster or jacket pocket.
Thank you and sorry for the dead thread bump.
|
08-30-2016, 07:40 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 16,601
Likes: 7,342
Liked 17,200 Times in 7,303 Posts
|
|
I have a 642 I use as a pocket gun when walking my dog. As far as I know 442 have locks and 642 don't bug I could be wrong
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
|
08-30-2016, 07:46 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chester County, PA
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 5,320
Liked 2,022 Times in 725 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arik
I have a 642 I use as a pocket gun when walking my dog. As far as I know 442 have locks and 642 don't bug I could be wrong
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
|
Nope. They're making 442s without locks now too. Tanners has them on sale for $350.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-30-2016, 07:53 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 16,601
Likes: 7,342
Liked 17,200 Times in 7,303 Posts
|
|
Ooh. I bought my 642 about a year ago, at Surplus City. They had them on sale for about the same price. +/- $10 but all their 442 were locks and the salesman said there were no 442 lock free so I bought the 642. I have no issues with the lock but given an option of one with and one without I'll buy the one without
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-30-2016, 08:09 PM
|
SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SLC, Utah
Posts: 5,060
Likes: 739
Liked 3,276 Times in 1,282 Posts
|
|
I believe that the only non-lock revolvers S&W is currently making are the Centennial series. They make pretty well all of that series with and without the lock in batches of them.
I have had several 642's since they were first sold in 1991. I cleaned all of them with Hoppes #9 that is probably 15 years old and every now and then, I stripped them completely and rinsed the frames off after the Hoppes scrub with brake parts cleaner. The Hoppes was never on the gun parts for more than a few minutes, the time it took me to scrub each part with a toothbrush. The brake parts cleaner evaporates quickly.
The only finish wear I have experienced has been some wear-through on frame edges, which showed up as black under the wear spots. I never experienced any flaking.
I believe that S&W has changed the finishes on their stainless and aluminum revolvers several times trying to come up with the most durable. the finish they used initially was pretty wear- and solvent-resistant.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-01-2016, 07:21 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: glen mills pa. USA
Posts: 775
Likes: 915
Liked 575 Times in 236 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philadelphia Patriot
Nope. They're making 442s without locks now too. Tanners has them on sale for $350.
|
Targetmaster in Chadds Ford has all the J Frames lock or no lock. The only J Frame that always has the lock is the 638. I know when the 638 first was first introduced had no lock.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-01-2016, 09:48 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: West Texas
Posts: 2,447
Likes: 5,289
Liked 3,903 Times in 1,519 Posts
|
|
My 442 ND was made in 12/93 and I bought it new in 4/94. It's been a real dandy and has a great many rounds fired through it by both my wife and I. She claimed it pretty soon after it joined our stable. I bought a used 642-2 1/15 that was made 9/12. It also looks extremely "rancid" (thanks to whomever posted that description somewhere above. I have been searching for a good description for mine!) but it shoots just fine. I just happen to think it would be just deserts to shoot a rancid predator with a rancid 642 ... LOL! Hope I never have to do that, but still ... that's the purpose we own this 642 and 442 for.
Been trying to get my wife to trade me the 442 for the 642 but she says the 642 is too ugly and it fits my personna much better than it does hers! She's probably right ... she usually always is!
__________________
So long ... Ken
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-02-2016, 07:09 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Mexico & Arizona
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 735
Liked 1,460 Times in 644 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy88Fingers
The newer 642s have a clear coat that can start flaking off. Whether or not Hoppes would trigger that, I can't say.
|
My 642-2 which is over 10 years old has some normal wear on the backstrap but is otherwise fine. My newer 642-1 which I have carried daily since I bought it 2 years ago still looks new.
__________________
Support your Police, & NRA
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|